Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32979576›Full record

ArticleClinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases2021

High-speed large-scale automated isolation of SARS-CoV-2 from clinical samples using miniaturized co-culture coupled to high-content screening.

Rania Francis, Marion Le Bideau, Priscilla Jardot, Clio Grimaldier, Didier Raoult, Jacques Yaacoub Bou Khalil, Bernard La Scola

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Rania FrancisInstitut Hospitalo-Universitaire Méditerranée-Infection, Marseille, France; Aix-Marseille Université, Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD), UMR Microbes Evolution Phylogeny and Infections (MEPHI), AP-HM, Marseille, France.
Marion Le BideauAix-Marseille Université, Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD), UMR Microbes Evolution Phylogeny and Infections (MEPHI), AP-HM, Marseille, France.
Priscilla JardotAix-Marseille Université, Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD), UMR Microbes Evolution Phylogeny and Infections (MEPHI), AP-HM, Marseille, France.
Clio GrimaldierAix-Marseille Université, Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD), UMR Microbes Evolution Phylogeny and Infections (MEPHI), AP-HM, Marseille, France.
Didier RaoultInstitut Hospitalo-Universitaire Méditerranée-Infection, Marseille, France; Aix-Marseille Université, Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD), UMR Microbes Evolution Phylogeny and Infections (MEPHI), AP-HM, Marseille, France.
Jacques Yaacoub Bou KhalilInstitut Hospitalo-Universitaire Méditerranée-Infection, Marseille, France. Electronic address: boukhaliljacques@gmail.com.
Bernard La ScolaInstitut Hospitalo-Universitaire Méditerranée-Infection, Marseille, France; Aix-Marseille Université, Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD), UMR Microbes Evolution Phylogeny and Infections (MEPHI), AP-HM, Marseille, France. Electronic address: bernard.la-scola@univ-amu.fr.
Méditerranée Infection Foundation · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesA novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is responsible for the current coronavirus disease 2019 global pandemic. Only a few laboratories routinely isolate the virus, which is because the current co-culture strategy is highly time-consuming and requires a biosafety level 3 laboratory. This work aimed to develop a new high-throughput isolation strategy using novel technologies for rapid and automated isolation of SARS-CoV-2.

methodsWe used an automated microscope based on high-content screening (HCS), and we applied specific image analysis algorithms targeting cytopathic effects of SARS-CoV-2 on Vero E6 cells. A randomized panel of 104 samples, including 72 that tested positive by RT-PCR and 32 that tested negative, were processed with our HCS strategy and were compared with the classical isolation procedure.

resultsThe isolation rate was 43% (31/72) with both strategies on RT-PCR-positive samples and was correlated with the initial RNA viral load in the samples, in which we obtained a positivity threshold of 27 Ct. Co-culture delays were shorter with the HCS strategy, where 80% (25/31) of the positive samples were recovered by the third day of co-culture, compared with only 26% (8/30) with the classic strategy. Moreover, only the HCS strategy allowed us to recover all the positive samples (31 with HCS versus 27 with classic strategy) after 1 week of co-culture.

conclusionsThis system allows the rapid and automated screening of clinical samples with minimal operator workload, which reduces the risk of contamination and paves the way for future applications in clinical microbiology, such as large-scale drug susceptibility testing.

Indexed as

AnimalsAutomation, LaboratoryBiomarkersChlorocebus aethiopsCOVID-19COVID-19 TestingHospitalizationHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMicroscopyNasopharynxReverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain ReactionRNA, ViralSARS-CoV-2Specimen HandlingVero CellsBiomarkersRNA, ViralCo-cultureCoronavirus disease 2019High-content screeningIsolationSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2

Identifiers

PMID32979576
PMCPMC7510445
OpenAlexW3087007327

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.